There was a lot of excitement in this draft, particularly around Lukosius, and that seem to generate talk of a super draft.
It is looking most likely that Carlton will take Sam Walsh, who appears to be as good as any of the usual #1 picks.
I thought at the time that the 2017 draft looked flat, in that it didn't tail off much as you went down the draft. It just wasn't clear if that meant it was flat and good or flat and mediocre. I was quite happy about that because pick 14 wasn't that far off in quality as the first few picks in the draft. It seems now that the draft was flat and very solid indeed. Pick 14 could have produce Ed Richards or Jack Higgins and the whole first round is looking quite good so far, and there are a number of players further down the draft who have shown plenty to look forward to, including our own Tom McCartin and Ryley Stoddart. I'm hopeful that Ling makes a worthy pick 14 once the dust settles.
-----------------------------
With Grundy, Macca and Naismith all signing on for next year it would appear that more than a few of our fringe players will be facing delisting. Towers, Marsh and Rose are looking nearly certain now. Most will say Foote will go as well, but I hope he gets another year. It's a shame about his injuries this year. He was starting to show a bit. Robinson and Newman are also subject to trade, but might just hang on.
Hey Ludwig
Obviously I wasn’t comparing Franklin now
I said in the draft
Both roughy and buddy at 17yrs of age “in the draft” looked another level
But the main point is that lower teams can't afford to take the risk of missing out on strong midfielders ahead of Blakey
There is a stack this draft
Last edited by Auntie.Gerald; 31st August 2018 at 05:12 PM.
Buddy looked good, but I guess not as good as Richard Tambling.
Auntie, I'm assuming you mean can't afford on missing out on strong midfielders. But there are only 2 strong midfielders in the draft: Walsh and Smith. So I'm not sure where the strong midfielders will come from after that. Surely there will be some, but it's less apparent than in some past drafts.
The hype about this draft came due to Lukosius, the freakish Rankine and the King twins.
It's not out of the question that Blakey could be midfielder. If Cripps and Bontempelli can be midfielders, why not Blakey? He's played on ball and hasn't looked out of place at all.
Last edited by Ludwig; 31st August 2018 at 05:20 PM.
Very happy for Reg and McVeigh to have been re-signed for another year. It wouldn’t surprise me if Reg has been signed as a mentor for the young defenders in the NEAFL. Experience around the club is invaluable.
GWS did a fair bit of that salary dumping, mainly to Carlton of course who also took a much over paid Lobbe from Port.
Unfortunately Saints are bereft of likely picks in this trade, maybe next years second if we do need the salary dump for something we're planning.
As for Blakey, appears he can play any position including in the middle but after three years aren't we still waiting for Mills to graduate to there? Suspect Blakey will begin as a high HF.
Jake Niall’s take on the Hannebery trade to Saints:
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...01-p5017u.html
“Dan Hannebery is a potential recruit, in what would indeed be a daring throw of the dice. But the Saints are reluctant to part with pick No. 4 in the draft, and rightly so.”
“It should not be part of any deal for Hannebery – merely picking up his massive three-year contract would be of sufficient benefit to the Swans.”
“Blake Acres and Luke Dunstan shape as trade bait, if there are takers. Jack Billings would fetch a nice pick, but as a player with some skill and a (latent) touch of flair, he’s probably of greater value to the Saints than the prospective pick.”
Bookmarks